U.S. & World

Zimmerman cleared in shooting of Trayvon Martin


Return To Article
  • snowman Provo, UT
    July 16, 2013 1:10 p.m.

    Jack: A meighborhood watch is only supposed to watch what is going on in the neighborhood and then call police. They are not to take things into their own hands. Martian was only walking down the street. Since when is that illegal. He had no weapns. Zimmermen had no business con fronting him.

  • Jack Aurora, CO
    July 15, 2013 7:55 p.m.

    A Neighborhood Watch has every right to carry a gun. He doesn't lose that right when he starts keeping an eye out in his neighborhood. The 911 operator has no authority to tell someone to do or not to do. A citizen is not legally bound to follow those suggestions. If you want someone to tell you what to do, then fine. I don't. This is a tragic ending to a story that was sensationalized, made into tabloid journalism, and just plain used for a certain agenda. The facts did not support a conviction. Done. We don't know who threw the first punch, Mr Z didn't testify and Mr Martin can't. We don't know who said what to who for the same reason. The facts just weren't there to support a conviction. The facts on this are clear: neither of us was in the courtroom. Neither of us heard the evidence or all the testimony or the jury instructions, so neither of us is qualified to judge this case.

  • snowman Provo, UT
    July 15, 2013 5:45 p.m.

    Another Perspective; As a citizen he has the right to have a gun. But as a neighboor watch person he shouldn't have had the gun. He should have did what the 911 operator told him to do.

  • MAYHEM MIKE Salt Lake City, UT
    July 15, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    @WRZ, ET AL: What part of "watch", as in "watchman," involves confrontation? My dictionary does not include "deputy" or "Junior G-Man," or "Chuck Norris," or any other community "hero" in its definition. A watchman can fulfill his duty with a) his eyes and b) a telephone, not a gun.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    July 15, 2013 6:30 a.m.

    Voice: "Or, OHBU, maybe nobody's afraid my "group" will riot because that "group" is made up of law-abiding citizens who don't take out their frustrations - of which there have been MANY for my "group" as of late - violently on their fellow citizens."

    Funny you say that, because that's exactly what Zimmerman did. He took out his frustrations on a young boy and killed him.

    But to your larger point. Tea Party protests are about political battles, and the qualms they have--about too high a tax rate, etc.--pale in comparison to the kind of institutional oppression others have experienced. Black-on-white crime is 8 times more likely to end in conviction than white-on-black crime. Study after study has found that drug abuse--both sales and use--in youths is statistically even between whites and blacks, yet blacks are jailed for drugs at a much higher rate. These are the types of things that cause riots. Your tax rate may go up, gay people might get married against your wishes, and you might be offered government health care, but that hardly compares to an increased likelihood of incarceration.

  • Another Perspective Bountiful, UT
    July 14, 2013 11:58 p.m.

    Re snowman

    As an American, Zimmerman DID have a right to carry a gun.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 14, 2013 11:20 p.m.


    Approaching someone to find out who they are and what their business is is not instigating something. Is Zimmerman supposed to wait for a house or two to get robbed then confront the robber?

    The answer to that question would be YES. Even as a neighborhood watch captain, Mr. Zimmerman had no reason to approach Mr. Martin, and was told very clearly by the 911 operator not to. Mr. Zimmerman as a neighborhood watch captain should not have been carrying a gun, and had no reason to get out of his car.

    "At the end of the day, a boy is still dead."

    He has only himself to blame.

    Really, Mr. Martin has only himself to blame? So he shouldn't have gone to get the skittles? Lets get real, according to this jury Mr. Zimmerman was not legally guilty of Murder 2 or Manslaughter, but the reality is Mr. Zimmerman's irresponsible actions are the cause of Mr. Martin's death. Mr. Zimmerman was wrong and is the one that deserves the blame, that may not make him guilty but it still makes him wrong.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    July 14, 2013 10:17 p.m.

    "He [Martin] was being checked out by a neighborhood watchman as was the watchman's right, responsibility, and duty."

    Nope. You are wrong wrz. First of all the neighborhood watch is taught NOT to follow people, just to call police and let them handle it. When Zimmerman went beyond the scope of his training he was no longer acting as a neighborhood watch.

    Second, neighborhood watch has no special authority. Nobody has to answer to them in anyway.

    But the bottom line, though, is none of that matters anyway. Martin had absolutely no idea who Zimmerman was. To Martin this was just a stranger following him. Stalking him.

    Remember, Zimmerman said that Trayvon was running away from him. There would have been no incident that night if Zimmerman had not pursued him. Zimmerman was the one advancing on the kid. He was the one stalking Trayvon.

    Trayvon, the "tough threatining thug" was running away. Probably scared. I know I would have been. But Zimmerman wouldn't leave it at that. Because he had profiled him.

    And what did Zimmerman see as suspicious? Listen to the 911 tape. The kid was walking in the rain and looking around.

  • JustDebora Castro Valley, CA
    July 14, 2013 10:09 p.m.

    Wiz, et al:
    Zimmerman was not "just doing his job". He was trying to do the job of the real police (a job he coveted) and he was told as much when the police dispatcher told him to stop following the teenager and let them handle it. Neighborhood Watch means just that: Watch. It's not Neighborhood Pursue, It's not Neighborhood Confront, It's not Neighborhood Approach. And it's not any of those because a neighborhood watch volunteer is not a trained peace officer and is not qualified or justified to approach someone because they don't look like they belong in the area. And even if Zimmerman had seen Trevon breaking into a house it still wouldn't have been his "job" to do anything but call 9-1-1 and wait for the real police to arrive.

  • snowman Provo, UT
    July 14, 2013 8:41 p.m.

    As a neighborhood watch person Zimmerman shouldn't have been carrying a gun. This verdict was wrong.

  • Alfred Pheonix, AZ
    July 14, 2013 6:11 p.m.

    "Zimmerman decided to approach Martin. He had no reason to do so."

    He had all the reason in the world to do so. Zimmerman was an on duty neighborhood watchman.

    "Self-defense is fine, but if you instigate the situation, can you really claim to be the victim?"

    Approaching someone to find out who they are and what their business is is not instigating something. Is Zimmerman supposed to wait for a house or two to get robbed then confront the robber?

    "At the end of the day, a boy is still dead."

    He has only himself to blame.

    "If you live in FLA you can carry a loaded gun, follow someone and then kill them if they, unarmed, attack you (even if they attack you in self-defense)."

    Unarmed??? The guy had two fists... and a cement sidewalk.

    "Just to clarify, you believe that if I... were walking down a sidewalk, with nothing in my pockets, I would still be considered "armed and dangerous" because of the concrete sidewalk?"

    Let's say that rather than a sidewalk it was a large club laying on the ground. Does that help?

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    July 14, 2013 5:47 p.m.

    "Trevon Martin was the one being followed by a threatening stranger."

    He was being checked out by a neighborhood watchman as was the watchman's right, responsibility, and duty. When confronted, the watchman was slammed in the face with a fist, thrown to the ground, a pummeled. This according to testimony.

    "When did he lose the right to self defense?"

    When did he get the right to cause physical harm to another?

    "Furthermore, although not legally guilty of murder, Zimmerman, in my opinion, was the PROXIMATE CAUSE of Martin's death."

    Zimmerman was just doing his job as a neighborhood watchman.

    "He had a clear alternative course: Call the police and leave enforcement to the professionals."

    Martin could easily have explained to the watchman what he was up to (headed home) and/or just beat it home. Instead, according to testimony he beat upon the watchman.

    "His failure to do so was reckless, unwarranted and precipitated the tragic outcome that ensued."

    Zimmerman has just as much right be there as Martin... for two reasons (1) it was his neighborhood, and (2) he was on watch duty.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    July 14, 2013 3:43 p.m.

    Wow. My comment really got censored? Let me try again.

    The point many people here are missing, and the point I think the jury missed is that Trayvon, according to Florida law, had a right to use force for self defense.

    To determine if someone can use self defense the standard is if a reasonable person would feel that there is a risk of grave bodily harm of death. Like Mark O'Mara, the defense attorney said, you don't even need to be harmed, you don't even need "a cut on your finger" to use self defense.

    Did Trayvon think there was a potential for grave bodily harm or death? Was he scared?

    A stranger is following him in a car on a dark night. Trayvon runs away. The stranger gets out of his car and keeps following him. If that happens to you are you afraid? Tell the truth. Do you think someone could mean you harm? Tell the truth.

    If the answer is yes, you have every right to defend yourself. By any means possible. Even if that means hitting the guy.

    Trayvon was running away. Zimmerman was going after him.

  • Voice of Reason Layton, UT
    July 14, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    Or, OHBU, maybe nobody's afraid my "group" will riot because that "group" is made up of law-abiding citizens who don't take out their frustrations - of which there have been MANY for my "group" as of late - violently on their fellow citizens. My "group," i.e. conservatives, are HARDLY a "privileged class", OHBU. Right now in society, likelihood to riot isn't linked to powerlessness or not, but on the underlying culture that has been taught to the people in those groups. Which is why we have literally thousands of crimes and assaults being committed by the Occupy types every time they squat in another public park, and literally zero - yes, verifiably zero - by Tea Party gatherings after they lawfully gather temporarily and peacefully in public spaces. And cleaning up after themselves.

  • postaledith Freeland, WA
    July 14, 2013 1:58 p.m.

    I felt very sad and angry about the verdict. I don't believe that justice was done for Trayvon Martin and his family. And the fact they are giving George his gun back so he can kill again.

  • Eddie Syracuse, UT
    July 14, 2013 12:39 p.m.


    This case has NOTHING to do with the stand your ground law. Those who think it does did not follow the trial or did not pay attention. It has to do with following someone and what you do when you follow someone and what you cannot do. George Zimmerman was found not guilty and rightfully so, according to the law!

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 14, 2013 12:04 p.m.

    RE: Lost

    No, that's not what I said at all. I don't even know how to respond to you. My words are still quite apparent on this thread; if you can't be bothered to read them and understand them, I don't know what to tell you.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    July 14, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    Time to get off Chris B’s back. There HAS been rioting. His assumptions, based on numerous actual past events, unfortunately proved correct.

    The Judge,
    You may be correct about Florida law, but if the family goes after him for civil rights issues, it will most likely be in federal court. Considering the disposition of our current injustice department headed by eric “fast and furious” holder, heaven help Zimmerman.

    You’re saying the jury was wrong, and Florida law is wrong, in allowing self-defense? Is that concept beyond your capacity to understand?

    The women firing in self-defense when confronted by an abusive spouse (assuming the situation is as you presented it) was wronged.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 14, 2013 10:24 a.m.

    When George Zimmerman called 911, asking for instructions, he was told to back off, to leave the young man alone. He ignored that warning, and was the aggressor throughout. Those are the facts, and they are not in dispute. An unarmed teenager was followed, hassled and provoked, and finally gunned down, in a confrontation that need never have happened.
    I agree that the prosecution botched the case. I agree that the jury, given the evidence presented in court, could legitimately say that reasonable doubt was established. But to valorize Zimmerman is repugnant. I am heartsick over this verdict, and in tears for the Martin family.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    July 14, 2013 10:22 a.m.

    Being in proximity of concrete is not a problem. But when you start slaming someone's head into concrete it becomes a serious problem.

  • djk blue springs, MO
    July 14, 2013 10:01 a.m.

    sad a young man was killed. yes he was walking into a community he knew well knowing there was a community watch group. yes he just purchased skittles and an ice tea. but yet do we forget what his history was ? the martin family needs prayers also positive support just as much as the zimmerman family needs prayers and positive support. the media is going to drag this on until the next sensational story. satan is urging this mob anger. if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all.
    there are many deaths everyday. why are these not as important ? because the liberal media enjoys sensational news that causes anger otherwise they don't have a story to report on.
    zimmerman will spend the remainder of his mortal life remembering that night wondering if he could of changed the outcome. trayvon's family will wonder if they had taught their son to respect and walk from anger or call 911 if in a situation then he may of been alive.
    don't be racist be kind ! hitler was a racist.

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    July 14, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    I too was so glad to hear this verdict. Don't get me wrong, I also think it was a tragedy for anyone to have lost their life over such a trivial event. But the political pressure that was brought to bear in this case -- just to get Mr. Zimmerman arrested, was inconceivable. This should have never been a national issue. Things like this, unfortunately, happen everyday, and in many cases, the racial roles are reversed, but we hear nothing about them.

  • KJR Alpine, UT
    July 14, 2013 8:11 a.m.

    Weeks of "often conflicting" testimony? That alone would seem to preclude finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. My fear was that the jury would compromise the standard of evidence by convicting of a lesser offence. I agree that the jury took the high road and followed the law. The tragedy of this whole situation (and certain people's reaction to it) is a message about cultural divides that are becoming more difficult to bridge. This is a time for sober reflection on how we can close those gaps -- not a time for anger and hyperbole.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    July 14, 2013 8:08 a.m.

    finally justice was served....

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    July 14, 2013 7:04 a.m.

    " I guess you didn't see 0bama inject himself into the trial by saying if he had a son he would look like trayvon? (Fox just played it again, now) He had no business saying anything about it. "

    This is part of the problem..... people on hear what they WANT to hear. Obama has given several speeches on the death rate of young black males. Just because the network you watch doesn't carry news of those speeches, doesn't mean they didn't happen. Read his talk he gave in July of 2012 in New Orleans.

    The outrageous thing is those who would try to politicize this.... they they would try to make this about Obama.

    The problem Zimmerman now has is just like what OJ had with his trial....the civil side. There, the burden of proof is much lower, and one does not need to be found guilty to be found contributory to the conditions where something went wrong. It will not be hard for some lawyer to prove Zimmerman had some role in creating the environment where this act happened. I never thought this was premeditated murder.... but something very much went wrong that night.

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    July 14, 2013 6:44 a.m.

    A young man is dead because Zimmerman created a situation he could not manage. Under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, someone now simply needs to create a hostile situation and then end it with a killing. 2nd degree? No, it was manslaughter and the initial charge should have been manslaughter.
    He should have stayed in his car and let law exforcement do their job.

  • TeaPublican Houston, TX
    July 14, 2013 6:40 a.m.

    George "John Wayne" Zimmerman is not afraid to stand up for his 2nd amendment rights! He is a true American Patriot!

  • Eddie Syracuse, UT
    July 14, 2013 6:20 a.m.

    Some of you are forgetting that it was Mr Martin that threw the FIRST BLOW. It is Not illegal to carry a gun. Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch person. It is not illegal to follow someone, especially when you are a neighborhood watch person and your neighborhood has been hit several times by thugs! It is against the law to approach someone and hit them and break their nose and pound their head on the cement!

  • JBQ Saint Louis, MO
    July 14, 2013 5:55 a.m.

    This was political from the very beginning. There was no way at all that the prosecution was going to get a conviction for Second Degree Murder. If the original charge had been Manslaughter, there was a good chance of a conviction in some form.

  • AZUTE1 Mesa, AZ
    July 14, 2013 12:43 a.m.


    "Just as Kacee Anthony, Oj Simpson and other notorious individuals have found, Karma will be biting at George Zimmerman's heels from here on out."

    LOL....Your comparison lacks something utterly/unequivocally crucial--Validity! LOL

    This was a blatant non-case, from its very inception, and your wish that GZ in someway "deserves" Karma, speaks volumes about those in support of bigotry/racism....I'll pray for you!

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    July 14, 2013 12:41 a.m.

    This trial should not have been given the national stage that it has. It was a media event that has distracted the nations attention from more important national matters. Everyone is fixated on this event as the US is involved in areas that it has no right, NSA spying on the populace, involvement in Syria, government spending which will be the downfall of our country.

    Zimmerman is the only person living that knows the truth of the events of that evening, if it was self defense his conscience will be able to accept the outcome, if it was not his conscience will haunt him.

    There are likely murder trials going in every State at this time. This trial should have been handled quietly in FL and not given national attention. The reason that it was not is because the DOJ got involved and stirred the pot. What is it that they do not want us to see now?

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    July 14, 2013 12:11 a.m.

    Re moderate

    The rational and right response of a young fit teenager being followed by an out of shape older man would be to lose him, to disappear if he thought the older man was a threat.

  • ThornBirds St.George, Utah
    July 14, 2013 12:10 a.m.

    There are many of us in this world who do not see a gun as the answer.
    Many of us do not see an individual who has a different shade of skin as the enemy.
    Much of our nation does not feel justice was delivered this evening.
    Although George Zimmerman was found "not guilty", this "victory" will never be such. There simply will be no where for him to go to find a life of peace and harmony.
    Just as Kacee Anthony, Oj Simpson and other notorious individuals have found, Karma will be biting at George Zimmerman's heels from here on out.

  • LRenayHawk La Vegrne, TN
    July 14, 2013 12:03 a.m.

    I'm angry. A 17 year old boy is dead and he shouldn't be. Justice was not done today. No matter what Zimmerman does for the rest of his life he will always be the man who killed an unarmed kid.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 14, 2013 12:02 a.m.

    Incidentally, white on black killings are 4x more likely to be considered "justifiable" than white on white or black on black killings (8x more likely than black on white killings). Yes that's not applicable to this case since Zimmerman is hispanic, but those people who think there's an issue regarding race and justice... it does exist, even if some people want to pretend it doesn't.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    July 14, 2013 12:01 a.m.

    Neighborhood watch is more than just watching; it is being friendly and getting to know your neighbors. It is being visible so potential criminals see that people in the neighborhood do watch out for each other and aren't easy targets. You can't do that without getting out on your neighborhood streets.

    Zimmerman had as much right to walk the streets of his neighborhood as Martin did. Both have the right to be the color they are. No crimes here.

    The claim that Zimmerman was somehow racist is not supported by any evidence. Those who continue to suggest that he acted out of racism are just spitting into the wind.

    Too bad the same can't be said of Martin.

    The evidence shows that Martin was assaulting Zimmerman, after referring to him as a 'crazy a-- cracker', a racist term. If you didn't catch that evidence, please go read the transcripts.

    Zimmerman didn't go hunt and gun Martin down. He stopped Martin from further assaulting him.

    Our jury system did the right thing. Now if the hot heads pumping the (non-existent) race angle would just do the right thing and leave this poor man alone.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 11:58 p.m.

    So a black woman firing warning shots when confronted by an abusive spouse gets no stand-your-ground defense and gets 20 years in jail but stalking a guy and then killing him in self-defense is okay. Florida law sure is inconsistent...

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    July 13, 2013 11:43 p.m.

    John Ford? Have you watched any TV or seen any movies in the 21st century? There has been about a million acts of violence with guns since the last John Ford western was made. Not to mention (but I will) video games where the hero is the shooter and killer. If you are going to blame pop culture, blame current day culture, not John Waynes era. And by the way, the defense proved that the "unarmed teenager" as you put it, was well armed with concrete. Not so innocent or defenseless as some were believing before the trial.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    July 13, 2013 11:02 p.m.

    Witness the might and right of citizen vigilantism: a dead, unarmed teenager. Can we Americans pull ourselves out of this John Ford movie and join civilization, where gun-toting vigilantism is a childhood fantasy that isn't allowed today for the very practical reason that it interferes with real police patrol?

    Think about it. How many teenagers routinely run around town daily, "up to no good"? Loads of them.

  • Frankenberry Saint George, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:49 p.m.

    It seems a sad truth to me that if both of these individuals had been white, or black, or if Zimmerman was black and Trayvon white nobody outside the state of Florida would have ever heard of this case.

  • John Reading LITTLETON, CO
    July 13, 2013 10:41 p.m.

    I am concerned that anyone would speak of "sides" in this case, especially since it appears to me that the "sides" are determined by race. I would think we all should be on the side of liberty and justice for all. Nothing in this case could possibly bring a 17-year old back to life; the best we can hope for is that the legal process worked correctly. That said, there clearly are issues of race which create barriers and divisions in our society. I encourage each of us take the time to confront our own feelings on race, and see if we are part of the solution or part of the problem.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:41 p.m.

    In case you didn't know, Obama early on injected himself into this case when he came out saying that Travon could have been his son, implying that Travon was the innocent victom. This all before any facts were known. Wrong of Obama or any President to do that.

    Moderate & Mayhem Mike
    From the best evidence presented, a 4 minute period elapsed where Travon could have been home before the violent confrontation occured. Likely Travon became the follower and landed the first blow. No way to know different, only speculation, but that is the best evidence presented.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:34 p.m.

    Tragic situation. I thought Neighborhood Watch meant WATCH not chase down and shoot.

    I thought we had police officers to pick up where neighborhood watch volunteers said there might be trouble.

    Silly me.

  • Aggielove Cache county, USA
    July 13, 2013 10:12 p.m.

    There are folks in this country that never cared about a conviction. Just how much goods they could steal in rioting, and also a reason to hurt others.

  • TMR Los Angeles, CA
    July 13, 2013 10:12 p.m.

    The jury may have got it right in terms of the prosecution not meeting the evidentiary standards in this case; however, it does not mean that Zimmerman is innocent on moral grounds. The fact that he had a loaded gun and got out of his car contrary to instructions to follow a teenage boy demonstrates quite clearly that he is an obstinate fellow who has very little moral ground on which to stand. This absurd event also reminds us all again the merits of strict gun control. I certainly don't need "Zimmerman"-type neighbors.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:10 p.m.

    " has made themselves a legitimate target for use of lethal self defense under Florida (and Utah!) law."

    Not true. In Utah Zimmerman would have been convicted. We don't have the strange "stand your ground law". In Utah if you pursue someone and shoot them, you will be convicted. You have a responsibility to stay out of a confrontational situation.

    This is a sad day for justice. What a Florida jury and the Florida judicial system just said is that people in Florida can legally walk up to someone, say something, or do something to get them to hit you, and then when they do hit you you can shoot them dead, and you will not be convicted.

    In fact it is even worse then that, the defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that a person does not even have to be injured at all to claim self defense, as he said, "not even a scratch on a finger," is needed to claim self defense. Only that you feel like you are threatened with bodily harm or death.

    So in Florida you can literally walk up to someone outside, shoot them dead, and then say you felt threatened.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 13, 2013 10:07 p.m.

    Re: Alfred

    Just to clarify, you believe that if I (or anyone) were walking down a sidewalk, with nothing in my pockets, I would still be considered "armed and dangerous" because of the concrete sidewalk?

    I'm sincerely asking if that is what you believe, I'm not mocking or anything. I obviously have my own opinion, but I am curious to know yours.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:04 p.m.

    Some people can get 3 comments posted, I can't even get one posted.
    As usual.

    If you live in FLA you can carry a loaded gun, follow someone and then kill them if they, unarmed, attack you (even if they attack you in self-defense).

    Good grief!

    My condolences to Trayvon Martin's family and friends.

    How hard is it to get a conviction of murder in FLA now?

    Researchers who've studied the effect of the laws have found that states with a stand your ground law have more homicides than states without such laws.

    "These laws lower the cost of using lethal force," says , an economist with Texas A&M University who examined stand your ground laws. "Our finds that, as a result, you get more of it."

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 13, 2013 10:00 p.m.

    I have no problem with self-defense. However, it is conveniently left out by the posters who are touting that on this thread that Zimmerman decided to approach Martin. He had no reason to do so. Self-defense is fine, but if you instigate the situation, can you really claim to be the victim? According to this jury, I guess you can.

    At the end of the day, a boy is still dead. It is sad to see these DN comment boards appear to forget that fact and instead drag the story into another political pawn used to bash the president and claim racism was the reason the case was even brought to trial. Some respect for the fact that a child was killed would be appreciated, especially since many of you are so defensive of unborn children on other articles.

  • Alfred Pheonix, AZ
    July 13, 2013 9:55 p.m.

    "An ice tea and a bag of skittles obviously means you are a criminal and deserve to be followed and gunned down."

    He had more than that... he had what amounts to a 'right cross' ans some cement to bang a head on. That's what got him into trouble.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:53 p.m.

    @ Bebyebe

    No, "An ice tea and a bag of skittles" does NOT "obviously mean you are a criminal and deserve to be followed and gunned down."

    However, an attacker who has pushed someone to the ground, breaks their nose, straddles them "mixed martial arts style" and is pounding their head on the concrete sidewalk" has made themselves a legitimate target for use of lethal self defense under Florida (and Utah!) law.

    Facts are important, and the jury heard the facts, as well as distortions from the prosecution, and agreed that Zimmerman was legally defending himself from imminent serious bodily harm or death.

    Good call, jury.

    Most concealed weapon permit holders' worst nightmare is ever using their gun to defend themselves. Training points out the serious legal and psychological burdens that can result even from a totally legal self defense shooting.

    This case was tainted by the media and the Obama administration from the start trying to turn it into a racial incident instead of a "self defense from a criminal attack" incident. If Martin had been Hispanic, and Zimmerman a black man who legally defended himself, no charges would have ever been filed.

  • Star Bright Salt Lake City, Ut
    July 13, 2013 9:39 p.m.

    Utah BD: apparently you haven't heard that the DOJ sent out a group to several areas to help with protests for trayvon? I guess you didn't see 0bama inject himself into the trial by saying if he had a son he would look like trayvon? (Fox just played it again, now)
    He had no business saying anything about it. There are hundreds of young black men murdered in his home town and he says nothing! Could it be because it's black on black crime?
    Of course he interjected himself into it.

  • LindonMan Lindon, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:39 p.m.

    America cannot afford to see the political and judicial lines cross into each other. Luckily that didn't happen tonight. The prosecution should have never let racial and political influences take this to court in the first place.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 13, 2013 9:38 p.m.

    Re: Chris B

    "Glad I am part of the peaceful group in this story"

    Well, one side supports a man who admittedly killed a child. The other side supports a child who fought an adult.

    I don't know how either side can claim to be "peaceful," especially the side you claim to support.

  • MAYHEM MIKE Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:35 p.m.

    I certainly support the 2nd Amendment, but add my opinion that if you lawfully carry a gun, and use it, even in self defense or in the defense of others, you will definitely be subjected to the worst legal hassle of your life. Furthermore, although not legally guilty of murder, Zimmerman, in my opinion, was the PROXIMATE CAUSE of Martin's death. He had a clear alternative course: Call the police and leave enforcement to the professionals. His failure to do so was reckless, unwarranted and precipitated the tragic outcome that ensued. I caution those of you with concealed gun permits to reflect--in detail--about the consequences of actually using your weapon. I would love to know Zimmerman's answer to the following question: "If you could relive that evening, would your actions be different?"

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:26 p.m.

    An ice tea and a bag of skittles obviously means you are a criminal and deserve to be followed and gunned down.

  • happymomto9 Saratoga Springs, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:25 p.m.

    obama took sides when he said, "if i had a son, he would look like trayvon martin."
    obama publicly pushed for zimmerman to be prosecuted (the doj was involved as well)

  • The Judge Kaysville, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:13 p.m.


    Martin's family will have a hard time winning any civil case against Zimmerman. Florida law states:

    "A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer."

    The guy with the good civil case is Zimmerman. Florida prosecutors violated his civil rights like Sherman violated Georgia.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:12 p.m.

    " A state has no business interfering in a persons right to defend themself "
    Trevon Martin was the one being followed by a threatening stranger.
    When did he lose the right to self defense?

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:04 p.m.

    happymomto9: don't hold your breath
    nc: obama inserted himself in the case when it happened. you might read and inform yourself before you post things that you have no clue about. in typical obama style he gives his opinion on local issues that he has NO jurisdiction or business getting involved with.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:01 p.m.

    This is the right verdict. A state has no business interfering in a persons right to defend themself for political or any other reasons.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    July 13, 2013 8:59 p.m.

    Voice of Reason,

    I never said riots are always justified. I only said that they stem from a feeling of being unjustly treated by those in authority. My point is that to say nobody would even suspect the group to which you belong of rioting, historically means that you belong to a privileged class (my broader point being to show call out those who are condemning large swaths of people for offenses they haven't even committed). If another group, however, is suspected of rioting, it is because there is a building sense of discontent within that group, and the perceived injustice is at or near a breaking point. Again, that doesn't mean the riot is actually justified, but that the group feels unjustly treated.

  • 3grandslams Iowa City, IA
    July 13, 2013 8:59 p.m.

    We have a racial problem in this land and it's not "white" only anymore and it wasn't commited by Trayvon's family either. Racial attitudes and problems are now centered in our politics and indivudual who have ulterior motives and agendas. I hope "main" america unites against those in power and put them in their place. This type of chaos will happen again.

    We ALL need to unite against tyranny and government abuse and politics.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    July 13, 2013 8:55 p.m.

    This has what to do with Obama? Good grief..... is Obama also responsible for your morning commute, or how sunday school class went.

    I do think that the jury came up with the only verdict that they could. The prosecution was horrible. I am not sure if it was that they were in over their heads, or if the facts just were not there. But either way, as I watched bits and pieces of this, I was always stunned by just how bad their case was.

    @Chirs.... can you name me one time when there war a riot for a conviction? ever? You think there was a reasonable chance that there was even a possibility a riot was expected - how? By whom? You comments are so..... hard to understand. Can you name me a time when a black person has been convicted - and there was a riot? Why in the world would you expect anyone to riot over a conviction?

    If your comments are about stupid people saying stupid things..... we have plenty of examples of people of all races making stupid comments.... thats an argument that goes no where.

  • Voice of Reason Layton, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:48 p.m.

    Ah, OHBU...are you seriously saying that those who riot are always justified because they are "not in positions of power"?

    Yes, many decades ago and earlier, there have historically been riots in response to real injustice. But I have news for you: in modern history, the vast majority of riots have more recently been completely unjustified and criminal acts.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    July 13, 2013 8:43 p.m.

    Chris B,

    I'm glad you're characterizing a large group of people by something they haven't even done at this point. And you're mad others are making assumptions about Zimmerman?

    As a side note, historically, it is not those in positions of power and privilege that riot. Riots, of which our nation has had many, usually break out because the underprivileged find that they are not being represented (Boston Tea Party, anyone?). To say you are in a group that was never going to riot, only says that you are in a position of privilege...that you feel justly treated by the institutions of authority.

  • happymomto9 Saratoga Springs, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:42 p.m.

    hope obama publicly admits that our judicial system has worked and that the decision of the jurors should be respected even if not agreed with.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:41 p.m.

    Time for the Martin family to follow the OJ model, and take Zimmerman to civil court where its much easier to find guilt and set the financial punishment.

  • Voice of Reason Layton, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:39 p.m.

    The prosecutors are cowards, pure and simple. They knew there was never enough evidence to convict, much less arrest him in the first place. Apparently, fear of rioting, being called "racist" by mindless lemmings, or blind hatred of gun-assisted self defense overcame their consciences. Instead, they relied on the courage of six women on a jury to tell the truth. Pathetic.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:37 p.m.

    Police were preparing for violence and rioting ONLY if he was acquitted.

  • Rick2009 MESA, AZ
    July 13, 2013 8:35 p.m.

    I don't think it ever should have gone to trial. There is only one reason it did and I don't think I will offer it up. Maybe two reasons and one is that the prosecutor wanted to make a name for himself, the other won't say.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:33 p.m.

    Truth prevails!

    I was never going I riot.

    Glad I am part of the peaceful group in this story

    Speaks volumes about the quality of both supporters that only one group is expected to start rioting

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    July 13, 2013 8:32 p.m.

    There are still some jurors that won't be bullied. Hats off to six brave women.